PRI #299 (was: Re: Adding RAINBOW FLAG to Unicode)
leob at mailcom.com
Fri Jul 3 23:14:07 CDT 2015
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org> wrote:
> Leo Broukhis <leob at mailcom dot com> wrote:
>> What I don't like about PRI #399 is its proposing to use default-
>> ignorable characters. On a non-vexillology-aware platform, I'd like
>> to see something informative, albeit not resembling a flag, but
>> indicative of the intention to display a flag, like RIS can be, as
>> opposed to nondescript white flags.
> This is just a personal prediction, but I'd guess that once the PRI #299
> mechanism hits the streets, U+1F3F3 WAVING WHITE FLAG will be used
> overwhelmingly for tag sequences and comparatively seldom on its own. When a
> reader sees , it might be relatively safe to assume the writer intended to
> display a specific flag.
But then a reader will have to look at the raw Unicode bytestream to
find out *which* specific flag was intended.
How convenient is that?
More information about the Unicode